wotfandomcom-20200222-history
Wotwiki talk:Category index/archive
Subcategories of People :rather than revert some of your changes of my changes, I'd like to explain my reasoning --Gherald 13:35, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC) * I think ever category that will only contain people _should_ have the People category as an ancestor. This includes Nationalities and Races, Skills/Trades, and Organizations. (but do note that we can still keep them under seperate header sections in this index, for easier editing). The reasoning is that they should be objectively thought of as "containers" of people, and thus useful and effective subcategories that everyone can understand. * I choose the shorter name Skills because I think this _includes_ most Trades and Organizations. I think we should stick with the shorter name, and simply clarify what it is for in the description. Or maybe theres a better name... * We can have an auxilary volountary organizations category if you really think it will be useful, but everything that is listed under it belongs some other place as well, mostly N&R or Skills/Trades/whatever-we-call-it. Categorization guidelines I personally think that Wikipedia's Categorization policy is too strict (i.e., that if it's in a child category such as "Channelers", it can't be in the parent category "People" too). I think this will make things harder to find on a specialized wiki. I'd rather see us crosslink things where it makes sense to do so, and work with a better layout of categories to begin with...Wikipedia had a disadvantage in that they only acquierd the Categories technology a short time ago, after most of their articles were written, I believe. nae'blis (talk) 21:09, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC) * Agreed on both counts. But I'm not sure how often it will be ''useful to dual-categorize something into the parent category of one of its categories. I'm not against it happening, I just don't see it becomming pervasive. --Gherald 21:26, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC) ** You know, this was one of those things that occurred to me while I was contemplating categorization schemes, and now that I'm here, I'm hard-pressed to think of an example. I think the nationality/cities in nations stuff may be the most troublesome thing so far... nae'blis (talk) 14:24, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC) Undercategorization Okay, having got some sleep, I've done a 180° on some of this. I'll see if I can explain what I'm getting at with the following test cases. How would you classify them? (the less sure of it I am, the farther down it goes): 'Rhuarc' * Category:Men, Category:Aiel, Category:Spearfighters (or whatever we end up calling it), Category:Hand and foot fighters ** Category:Male Aiel, Category:Clan chiefs, Category:Fathers *** Category:Tardaad, Category:Aethan Dor Category:Married men The reason I'm now advocating a combined category of Male Aiel is that there's no way to get that list by itself under the current system; they can be in both, but clicking on either gives you a much too broad list. * This one is easy: Category:Tardaad Category:Clan chiefs , plus whatever spearfighting/hand and foot thing we come up with. I am not yet sure about Fathers, Married men, etc. They may be useful, but they would be of secondary importance to the other categories. They also won't have any subcategories to speak of, so they can be figure out later. --Gherald 13:46, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC) 'Almoth' * Category:Places, Category:Nations, Category:Historical ** Category:Historical nations, Category:Battles Ditto here with Historical nations. What do you think? * Almoth Plain, if it exists, should have the Category:Battles. If it does not, then Almoth can have it. * Category:Places is not appropriate, because whichever Nations tag we end up with will be a subcategory of it. * I would stick with Category:Nations, and Category:Historical. We can have a Historical nations list that doesn't clutter the categories. But if you think it will be useful, Category:Historical nations could be a subcategory of Category:Nations, and that would work fine too. --Gherald 13:52, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC) ** I think I was trying to think of a way to go from one Ten Nations nation to another via a category, but if we include the list under See also in every nation's entry, that should work too. nae'blis (talk) 14:45, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC) National subcategories Side note: e.g. Category:Andor will contain both people from Andor and places in Andor, and be a subcategory of both Category:Nationality/Origin and Category:Nations. This is by design. --Gherald 13:52, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC) : Yeah, I agree with that, I think. I like the simplicity there; do we go with Andor or Andoran? Which does Wikipedia use for geographical articles? nae'blis (talk) 14:45, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC) :: We go with Andor because it sounds better, is shorter, and simpler. Shieneran, Tairen, etc. would be annoying. Also, Andoran is not suitable for Category:Nations ... Andoran is what we would use if we wanted a seperate category for people. --Gherald 14:49, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC) ::: I like it. I like what you wrote in the Index itself about using Category:Historical xxxxx, should it become necessary. Not sure it is, yet. nae'blis (talk) 15:01, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC) White Tower * Accepted ** under Aes Sedai, maybe? nae'blis (talk) ** Not unless they have been raised. Gherald ** But they're not a standalone category of channelers, only women in the White Tower. nae'blis (talk) * Kin * Novices ** see above? Maybe a superheading Category:Women of the White Tower, which would include Laras, Mistress of the Kitchens? nae'blis (talk) ** They are a standalone category of channelers, because Laras doesn't channel and I don't know of any way to group Novices, Accepted, and Aes Sedai together short of Category:White Tower channelers. A White T'ower affiliation category of some sort might be useful, but "Women of the White Tower" has the misfortune of being too general ''and too specific and too long.'' Gherald ** Let's follow your suggestion for geographic articles and just cat the cats them under White Tower? I don't agree that they're standalone, as they're defined by virtue of being part of the White Tower. nae'blis (talk) *** I am much more likely to want to see a list of novices or a list of accepted or a list of a particular ajah's members than I am to want to see a list of all women affiliated with the White Tower. The distinction between novices, accepted, and bona fide aes sedai is very significant, or at least used to be. --Gherald 07:06, 28 Oct 2005 (UTC) **** Not sure I get what you're saying; White Tower would include subcats for Aes Sedai, Accepted, Novices, Warders, and probably something like Tower Guard. I've gotten away from the idea of trying to use the cats as inclusive lists of everyone involved, though I don't really see a better way to collect that information. nae'blis (talk) 17:27, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) ***** All well and good, but those people don't belong under Channelers, which was the context of this discussion. Novices, Accepted, and Aes Sedai do belong. Putting those three in triple-compound subcategory "Women channelers of the White Tower" would be silly. Warders and Tower Guard obviously can't have Channelers as an ancestor. --Gherald 20:11, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) ****** Ahhh, now we're getting somewhere. I don't see categories as hierarchical *at all*, merely organizational. White Tower isn't a subset of Channelers, but Category:Aes Sedai is a subset of both Category:Channelers and Category:White Tower, in my world. Once you get below second-tier actegorization it's all going to get weird anyway (like Category:Andor having both people and places). Once we get the CI sorted out, the page should probably be reformatted for easier use (maybe split into two columns, if that's not too horrible). nae'blis (talk) 20:33, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) ******* Then we're in agreement. This whole discussion started because you wanted something different: To put Accepted and Novices under Aes Sedai... but now that I really think about it, that might not be such a bad idea. Not because it's not very important to distinguish between those who have been raised, but because we can already do that with each Ajah's subcategories. Sorry for not realizing this sooner... --Gherald 20:48, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) ******** Yikes, and I was all set to agree with you... I actually had to go back through the edit history to figure out why I said that originally, and it was because we didn't have anything to encompass everybody associated with the WT who wasn't necessarily AS. I think I see what you're saying now (no actual AS show up in Category:Aes Sedai, because they'll all be listed under their individual Ajah...right? nae'blis (talk) 21:19, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) ********* "Yes, Mother" Gherald courtsied deeply ********** Oy, wait, what about women who trained in the Tower but can barely channel or can't channel at all, like Morgase? Do we include them under novices, or do we have some sort of "Initiates of the White Tower" category? Narvi 10:37, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC) *********** Put them under Novices if you know they were an actual "novice", which for instance Elayne was, but I don't know about Morgase. If not, put them under channelers if you know they could channel at all (Morgase had "some small ability" IIRC). If not, don't put them under anything having to do with channeling at all, and simply note in their article that they trained at the White Tower. Simple... --Gherald 23:33, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC) Entertainment * why have a category with only one subcategory? nae'blis (talk) ** Rand al'Thor will be in this category (lots of flute playing, remember?) .... among others. We can classify Thom and Asmo under Musicians if you prefer, and ommit the Bard&Gleemen. I'd like to avoid Category:Musicians_Bards_and_Gleemen, you see. Or we could climb even further up and only use Entertainers. We only know one or two Illuminators, right? Illuminators was your category, and is what motivated me to create Entertainers and flesh it out with Musicians and Bards. Gherald *** Actually I've re-added Illuminators under (voluntary) Organizations), below. nae'blis (talk) **** OK, but volountary organizations is probably the least useful part of this entire page --Gherald 08:01, 28 Oct 2005 (UTC) ***** I don't see why; it's just another categorization scheme to find what you're looking for. I could say the same thing about Trades, something I'd rather put under Skills... nae'blis (talk) 17:10, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) Organizations * volountary organizations is probably the least useful part of this entire page --Gherald 08:01, 28 Oct 2005 (UTC) ** I don't see why; it's just another categorization scheme to find what you're looking for. I could say the same thing about Trades, something I'd rather put under Skills... nae'blis (talk) 17:10, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) *** Just another, yes, but much less useful because volountary has nothing to do with whether something requires skills, and skills are what should be of interest. I too believe all Trades belong under Skills. IIRC, "Trades" is something of your own devising. I want Skills (or a better name if you can come up with it) to be the parent category of almost everything People-related that does not have to do with Races and Nationalities, gender, and Channelers. Actually, Channelers could probably be a subcategory of Skills now that I think of it. But it's important enough to keep seperate, if we so decide. --Gherald 20:05, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) *I'd like to split off the discussion about this. What exactly is your objection to it, Gherald (or anybody)? There are a lot of voluntary organizations that people belong to (Asha'man, Aes Sedai, CotL, Darkfriends, Illuminators, Band of the Red Hand, Tinkers (although the last one is arguable). Just trying to split out the discussion for that topic from others, to avoid confusion. nae'blis (talk) 17:10, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) ** I am far less interested in whether an organization is volountary than I am in having it automatically subcategorize members of that organization under certain skills (Or Races and Nationalities, in a few cases such as the Sea Folk). You seem to think a volountary organizations category is important. Fine, make one. But it should be auxilary: don't "move" subcategories out of other places where they also belong. --Gherald 20:05, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) *** See above for why I won't be moving anything OUT of anywhere, merely giving it multiple supercategories that it belongs too. We'll see what it looks like once we have a critical mass of articles... nae'blis (talk) 20:35, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC) Historical Characters Should there be a category for historic characters? Lastra Posae doesn't fit anywhere else but Aes Sedai although she is certainly not of the modern sort. I dunno, people get mentioned in the books and it might be handy to group the people that get mentioned in a historical context in one category? Or do you think there are enough categories already? Elliot N 14:35, 7 April 2006 (UTC) Items Created in the Age of Legends Should this be a specific category. Glowbulbs, sho-wings, lightsticks, these are items that are the product of research in science and not the power. So they wouldn't fall under ter'angreal. I just don't know what a good name for it would be? Elliot N 14:57, 7 April 2006 (UTC) :Hmmmm, Category:Items of Legend? Category:Age of Legends items? nae'blis (talk) 19:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC) ::The second, with a parent of Category:Age of Legends. The first sounds like a category for legendary items, which isn't quite the same thing. --TheParanoidOne 05:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC) :::Yah I would have to agree with Paranoid. Elliot N 18:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC) :::I liked the second one better too, I'm just not sure what else would go here. Right now cuendillar and stasis box are in the parent category Age of Legends, but we could have Category:Items from the Age of Legends, Category:Aes Sedai from the Age of Legends (which addresses Elliot's question above, too). Hmmm, can you put parentheses in categories? Category:Aes Sedai (Age of Legends) ... apparently so. That mimics the article at Aes Sedai (Age of Legends), too. nae'blis (talk) 19:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC) ::So then should we have something like Category:Items (AoL) or are we avoiding abbreviations? - Elliot N 15:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Geology Should this category be called Geology or somethin like Geographical Formations or even be split up for things like Mountains, Rivers? Or is this too specific with not enough other ones that we know of? - 72.142.113.2 16:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC) Culture/Customs Somewhere out there, there's a Category:Culture, which I've been adding things to, but which doesn't seem to be on the Category index page. On the Category index, there's a Category:Laws and customs, which has things like Tower Law and ji'e'toh in it. Should general cultural information go in Category:Laws and customs? The sort of thing I'm looking at as general cultural information might be things like marriage customs, costume/fashion, festivals, order of society, funeral customs, and that sort of thing (in short, things that are more codified by practice than by law). Ogier 20:00, 29 September 2006 (UTC) Sword Forms And while I'm poking about in here, is there/should there be a category for sword forms? I'm noticing that TheParanoidOne seems to have a lot of them on his list of things that don't have pages yet. Ogier 20:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC) :I'm not sure how useful that would be, seeing as for most of them we we don't know anything beyond the name. --TheParanoidOne 20:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC) :Hopefully a Sword forms will be enough. --Gherald 20:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC) ::Ah, you're right. That's a much better plan. Ogier 20:51, 2 October 2006 (UTC) Resident Categories I was poking around in Category:Uncategorized, seeing if I could lend a hand, and ended up creating Category:Two Rivers Residents, and made it a sub of Category:Two Rivers. Not sure if this is a helpful addition or not, but it seemed to be a little better of a category for some stub articles, like Bili Congar or all the Cauthom sisters. It also serves to keep fairly broad categories such as "Two Rivers" from being cluttered up with numerous tiny articles. That's why I chose to go with a category, as opposed to simply a list of Two Rivers Residents. Although, I might start work on a list of Two Rivers Residents. Thoughts? --DanceTheSpears 01:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC) :Belatedly, I like it with a slight change. I'm starting to like a Category:Andor (people) under Category:Andor, for just this reason. For one thing, it'll make auto-categorizing based on the template much easier... -- nae'blis 17:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)